OirishM Egalitarian [score hidden] 7 hours ago: I don't think the CDC (where the made-to-penetrate term either originated from, or whom it was at least popularised by) had such noble intentions from what I can gather.....

Sorry, but you'll have to do better than that if you want to convince us that MRAs have tried to shut down feminist events, in the same way that there is undeniable evidence of feminists pulling fire alarms, using noise generators, etc. to shut down MRA events.

The fact that the CDC explicitly classifies "MTP" victims as not rape victims, and then trumpets the fact that "only" 1 in 71 men are raped (since men raped by women are not rape victims, according to them).

People who live in a town with honest policemen and no history of police corruption, are unlikely to fear the police. No reason to.

Those who live in a town or country with a long history of police corruption, are likely to fear the police. Of course it's still wrong to judge an honest cop for the actions of others, but the fact remains that people have good reason to fear the police.

You called the author a liar. You provided no evidence of him being a liar.

I explained specifically what statements were false, and why - not just calling him a liar with no explanation. It's true I didn't cite a specific study, which is quite understandable in a short letter, and considering that the original article also cited no studies.

Where are the subs that don't treat "feminism" as a dirty word?

Again, you continue to be dishonest. I never said that Reddit was pro-feminism (although some subreddits certainly are). What I said was, Reddit is not a "pro-MRA safe space".

Not supporting men's rights is not equivalent to supporting feminism. Only about 20% of Americans identify as feminist (not sure about Canada). That does not mean that the other 80% are MRAs. And obviously, more people identify as feminists than MRAs.

You then changed that to "Where are the subs that don't treat "feminism" as a dirty word?".

Throughout this conversation, you have repeatedly made dishonest statements. You refuse to admit you were wrong on your initial point, despite me showing ample evidence.

Despite you claiming to give charitable interpretations, you have represented my own statements in the worst possible way - often outright misrepresenting it. Meanwhile, you have given extremely biased interpretations of the opposing argument (e.g. "saying that rape is the result of violent men, is not saying that rapists are men").

Luckily, I don't need to convince you. I just need to convince readers, who, if they read this thread, would see that people do get vitriol simply for bringing up men's issues.

But you writing a vitriolic pro-MRA letter to the editor is hardly an example of it.

Everyone can see my letter. Where is the vitriol?

You responded to the unsourced and baseless article with an unsourced and baseless attack on the author.

What baseless attack on the author?

I'm not defending them for saying you were spreading hate speech, I'm trying to explain to you why you received a negative impression.

And you are doing that, why?

Remember, we are discussing whether people are likely to receive vitriol for bringing up men's issues. And the example I brought up is illustrative of that.

At the end of the day, I was called a misogynist and spreading hate speech for saying things that everyone here can see is neither of those. And that proves my original point.

You're on Reddit, an MRA safe space

Reddit = MRA safe space? On MRA subreddits, sure. Everywhere else? No. People are slightly more receptive to the idea of men's issues, compared to universities or some such (though many are still hostile of course). But pro-MRA? Not at all.

You gotta get over your serious bias if you expect people here to listen to you.

You are trying to tell me that no one gets vitriol for bringing up men's issues, while also defending calling people misogynist and spreading hate speech for disagreeing with an unsourced and baseless article telling all men that they are responsible for stopping domestic violence.

I pasted my full letter, and everyone here can see that nothing in it was misogynist or hateful. And yet multiple people accused me of that anyway.

And you are trying to tell me that it's my fault for not being more supplicating and apologetic in my disagreement. And that people don't insult those who bring up men's issues, even though you yourself also said that some audiences are not receptive towards the subject.

If I said that muggings are the result of violent blacks, then I am implying that it's only black people who commit muggings. That is obviously racist and false. If I then assert that 2% of muggings are done by non-blacks, that does not excuse my original statement.

Even here you're repeating the same misinterpretation.

No, I made no misinterpretation.

You on the other hand, claimed I accused the author of saying that all men are rapists, when I said no such thing. That is an actual misinterpretation.

From my point of view, I can't see how such a reading is reasonable at all.

Then your bias is showing.

I do my best to apply the principle of charity when reading something that appears controversial

And yet you described my factual statement of ""Women choose to pursue lower-paying professions (teaching over engineering), safer and more comfortable professions (secretarial work over garbage collecting), choose to take more time off work, choose to work less hours than men."

as "women enjoy earning less money".

You are a clear hypocrite.

I don't see any evidence that you received vitriol for "bringing up men's issues."

Hold up, I'm addressing your words:

Remember, this is not a receptive audience you're talking to.

So you admit then that certain audiences are likely to be hostile to men's issues? Thus one is likely to receive vitriol just by bringing it up.

Sorry, it seems like you just don't want to admit the obvious fact that one is likely to receive vitriol just by bringing up men's issues.

Edit: Oh, and let's not forget that I was accused of hate speech and misogyny. It's true I didn't cite a specific study. Which makes it less likely that people would believe me. Does that make it hate speech? Obviously not. Nothing I said was hateful yet I was accused of it anyway.

"Muggings are the result of violent blacks. 98% of muggings are caused by them".

"Whoa there, that's pretty racist. It's not only blacks that commit muggings. And that statistic is just false".

"But I never said that all blacks commit muggings, just the violent ones. And I specifically said that 2% of muggings aren't caused by blacks".

Just to illustrate how biased you are.

If those statistics are false then they're false, and that's a problem with the author's argument. But surely you can see that you cannot correct false unsourced statements with your own unsourced statements?

As I already said, I can't source studies in a 200 word letter to the editor. Have you ever seen such a letter cite specific studies? No, you haven't.

A full article however, should have mentioned studies.

I don't see how that is an "argument", it's a simple statement of fact. If we're discussing the earnings of women then that is inextricably linked to the earnings of men.

If it's a tautology, why even mention it? He's obviously implying that men and masculinity are somehow responsible for the gender pay gap.

....Remember, this is not a receptive audience you're talking to.

Thanks for admitting my original point. You claimed that one would not receive vitriol for bringing up men's issues. I replied that they would. You denied it, and came up with all sorts of BS to justify that. Now you have implicitly admitted I was correct.

Much like while it seems obvious that the author did not intend to say that all rapes are committed by men

Sure. And people who say that muggings are the result of violent black people do not intend to say that all muggings are committed by black people.

But I really don't see how the sentence you quoted claims that "all rapists are men."

If you can't, then you must not be looking.

If I said that "muggings are the result of violent black people", I am clearly implying that muggers are black people. (which is not the same as saying that black people are muggers).

It seems clear to me from the context that the author is not saying "all men are violent rapists",

Never said he was. Now you are making up false implications. I said he was saying that all rapists are men.

So, respectfully, I suggest that the negative reception of your letter was not because you were presenting a taboo opinion, but rather because you misunderstood the author and were making multiple false accusations about them. From my point of view it looks like you're the one in the wrong here.

With respect, then you are clearly biased. You take issue with a simple statement of fact, but have no issue with the false and unsourced statements that 98% of rape and 95% of domestic violence is caused by men. And have no issue with the unsupported argument that women earning less is "linked with men".

You present it in a way that suggests men simply like money more than women and choose to have more of it.

Not at all. I suggested that men like money more than they do quality of life, relative to women.

As if women enjoy making less money.

LOL...you accuse me of making false implications (author said the gender pay gap is linked with men, and I said that he's implying that women earning less is somehow caused by men), and then you give me this crap?

Talk about hypocrisy.

I don't suggest that women enjoy earning less, but rather they enjoy quality of life and work-life balance more than money - relative to men.

How do you typically respond to a 200 word reddit post that trashes a point of view you hold without providing any substantial evidence or argument in support?

If they asserted I was wrong and provided no evidence, I would ask for evidence, since there is no reason not to provide it in a reddit comment. And in fact, that exact situation happens all the time.

Notice the outright false statistics, or the claim that all rapists are men:

It’s time for all of us to recognize that rape is not the result of “careless women,” but violent men.

Frankly, I was more civil than the author deserved.

But surely you also can realize that when you make comments like "women choose to make less money than men" you're coming off rather antagonistically?

I didn't say what you quoted. I said:

"Women choose to pursue lower-paying professions (teaching over engineering), safer and more comfortable professions (secretarial work over garbage collecting), choose to take more time off work, choose to work less hours than men."

And that's a fact, and relevant to bring up if someone claims that women earn less money somehow because of men.

In fact, you perceiving a statement of fact as antagonistic simply because you dislike it, is demonstrative of your bias.

Writing a letter accusing someone of dishonesty and sexism without providing any support beyond vague references to "studies"

You don't exactly have space to link studies in a 200 word letter. Also, I did reference specific studies in a follow-up letter - not that it was necessary, because everything I stated was true.

Moreover, notice how the original article made sweeping claims without providing a single source of evidence.

Regardless, my point remains - you try bringing up the issues like male victims of DV in certain environments - and you'll get vitriol regardless of how you frame it.

Well, I've discussed the Canada Child Benefit issue with people (they recommend the woman apply rather than the man in a partnership).

That issue isn't very controversial, so I wouldn't expect much opposition.

For instance, when I was in university, someone wrote an article talking about, among other things, how because 95% of domestic violence is perpetrated by men, all men are responsible for stopping it. I wrote a letter replying to it:

Women's issues are indeed important, but Katic uses logical fallacies, misleading omissions, and even outright lies. No cause, no matter how worthy, should be promoted with such tactics.

Katic says that everyone should care about women's issues, and he's right. But he's wrong when he says that all men are responsible for them. It is logically invalid to say that all members of a group are responsible for the actions of some of its members, when membership in the group is due solely to accident of birth.

Women commit the majority of child abuse, the vast majority of infanticide, false rape allegations, and 100% of paternity fraud. Would Katic agree that all women are responsible for stopping these despicable acts?

Katic implies that the gender pay gap is caused by men. In fact, it is because of choice. Women choose to pursue lower-paying professions (teaching over engineering), safer and more comfortable professions (secretarial work over garbage collecting), choose to take more time off work, choose to work less hours than men.

Katic claims that 95 percent of domestic violence is committed by men. This is simply false.

There has been no legitimate study that claims that 95% of DV is committed by men. The only sources for this number are unscientific and flawed, such as police statistics and figures from domestic violence shelters; and one survey (the U.S. Crime survey). In contrast, there are literally dozens of scientific and methodologically valid studies that show DV is about equal by gender. The domestic violence wikipedia page has links to metastudies (collections of scholarly studies) that show this.

Further, Katic's claim would imply that lesbian partners would be largely non-violent, whereas gay men would have much more violent relationships. Studies show that both gay and lesbian relationships show equal violence to heterosexual ones.

I applaud Katic's goal of promoting women's rights. I urge him not to do so at the expense of men, the vast majority of which are good, decent people.

In response to that civil and moderate letter, I was called a misogynist, promoting hate speech, etc. That same newspaper editorial board - which I had previously served on two years prior - told me that they considered not printing it because some of them considered it to be hateful.

So I promise you, you will receive vitriol by presenting issues, regardless of how moderate or civil you are.

Do you suppose it's the left, or the right, who would say things like this:

Student organizations representing women’s interests now routinely advise students that they should not feel pressured to attend or participate in class sessions that focus on the law of sexual violence, and which might therefore be traumatic.

One teacher I know was recently asked by a student not to use the word “violate” in class—as in “Does this conduct violate the law?”—because the word was triggering.

We both know that only one political side would say things like the above.

Nothing about them wanting to risk complaints suggests they're worried about losing their jobs. I think you have a very poor understanding of how these jobs work. You're just inferring that because they don't want to make students uncomfortable that they believe they will be fired.

They didn't say that they don't want to make students uncomfortable. They said it's not worth the risk of complaints.

Both men and women teachers seem frightened of discussion, because they are afraid of injuring others or being injured themselves